@spendius,
Quote:I notice you are shifting your position slightly ff.
What position? I'm not shifting any position.
I have gone from talking about a criminal trial, which is over, to civil actions which are now pending. These are quite different legal proceedings, brought for quite different reasons, and brought by different parties, although they both involve Conrad Murray.
Quote:Dr Murray's conviction puts AEG in the frame for a serious pay day for the legal profession and for media. Hence there was a big money motive for a guilty verdict
I don't really think so. People from AEG testified at the criminal trial and made it quite clear they had not wanted to hire Murray and it was Jackson who insisted they do so. They wanted to hire a doctor in London to attend to MJ's medical needs. So, blaming AEG for Murray's behavior in regard to Jackson isn't going to fly, unless they can prove that AEG was aware of what Murray was doing, and the risk it posed to Jackson, and they continued to retain him. There is also the interesting additional factor that Jackson never signed the contract with AEG that involved Dr. Murray, which is the reason Murray never got paid for his two months of providing "medical services" to MJ. So, technically, there was no existing legal relationship between AEG and Conrad Murray.
The guilty verdict came from 12 jurors, and those 12 people are in no way involved in any money motive regarding these civil cases. They decided a criminal verdict, based on the evidence presented in a criminal trial, which hinged on appropriate standards of medical care and the issue of Conrad Murray's criminal negligence in failing to adhere to such standards.
Quote:It is one giant exercise in ambulance chasing
Do you even know what ambulance chasing is? You're certainly not using the term correctly in this context.
This is not a case where the lawyers solicited business--members of the Jackson family sought out and retained attorneys. And the fees those attorneys receive in a civil settlement is determined and fixed by law, and, if they are not successful in obtaining a verdict and monetary award in favor of their client, or a financial settlement beforehand, they don't get paid.
The civil action against AEG is going to involve disclosure of MJ's significant financial distress. The public assumed MJ had a lot of money, when, in fact, he was actually close to being financially destitute and very close to losing his remaining assets because he was $400 million in debt. His clear, rather desperate, need for money allowed him to be manipulated, and exploited, by a number of people surrounding him, including those from AEG, who pushed him from an initial commitment to do a 10 show tour, which was his initial desire, into a 50 show obligation which may have posed a crushing burden for him to contemplate. And taking advantage of MJ's well known problem with prescription drugs, and possibly using that drug problem to gain leverage and control over him, by even helping to supply him with a physician drug-pusher, would be part of that conspiracy involving AEG that the suit alleges.
So, while the outcome of the civil suits does involve money, another purpose is to try to expose a great deal of behind the scenes maneuvering and exploitation of Jackson, in order to try to show that Jackson was victimized by these people, and AEG, in a way that directly contributed to his death. These are wrongful death suits.
If one is interested in either Michael Jackson's affairs, or drug use, or business dealings, or all the backstage intrigue involved with them, then the forthcoming revelations of these civil actions will probably be fascinating, although also unflattering to Jackson's image. But I'm not sure that the general public, or even most of Jackson's fans, will really be interested in this sort of thing. I don't expect a great deal of media attention to focus on these matters for that reason.
Jackson's mother and children have a vested interest in keeping his image alive because that contributes to the money-making capacity of his estate, of which they are the primary beneficiaries. And Jackson has earned considerably more money dead than he was doing when he was alive. But, they are also the most aggrieved parties in terms of his untimely death, both because of their close emotional ties to him, as well as the fact he was their primary means of support while he was living. So they have quite legitimate reasons for bringing a civil suit against anyone they believe caused his wrongful death.